One issue I'm not hearing much about is the settler situation in the Gaza Strip. When I first heard that the Israelis were going to bulldoze the settlements after they were evacuated, I thought, what an incredibly churlish act. In a desperately overcrowded land that needs any kind of housing, I couldn't believe the Palestinians agreed to the destruction, as was reported. Now I think I understand.
When you look at the pathological violence and hatred spewed by the most extreme of the Settlers movement, I believe if the houses weren't destroyed, some of them would always be trying to return and reclaim "their" property. According to reports, many extremists have infiltrated the Gaza settlements. Dozens of Israeli soldiers have deserted rather than take part in the expulsions, nine with their military weapons.
I can't ever recall a more precarious time in Israeli politics. Ariel Sharon is a repellantly venal, lying sack of suet. He's always been the primary settlement queen in right-wing politics and, I believe, he's still striving toward that goal. By sacrificing about 8,000 homes in the Gaza, he hopes to accelerate the usurpation of Palestinian lands in the West Bank. Somehow, I think he was unprepared for the vehemence of the settlers' reaction to his "sacrifice".
Yitshak Rabin was assassinated in 1995 by an outraged settler because he threatened their hegemony of the "biblical land of Israel". I have a bad feeling about the ongoing "peace process" in Israel. Too many mouth-foaming fanatics have guns and a holy mission. When and if the army begins to remove settlers by physical force, it's all too likely that some soldiers and settlers will die. Israeli society is very divided on this issue. Who knows how it will be affected by violent clashes? It could lead to widespread demonstrations, strikes and even more assassinations. Perhaps more likely,we would see retaliation against the Palestinians and Jewish Arabs. The young deserter with his rifle who shot up a bus full of Jewish citizens who happened to be of Arab descent is a chilling omen of the dangers ahead.
In a few days, as reported by NPR this morning, hundreds of disaffected Jews have stated their intention to assemble at the Wailing Wall and possibly storm the Al-Aqsa Mosque. How will THAT play out in Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq? This seems like a big story to me. What will the neoclowns do?
Posted by DeminNewJ at August 9, 2005 05:34 AMIt's cool that the Space Shuttle made it back safely. I think it may be time for us to retire the shuttles, though; this run was a little too suspenseful.
Posted by dj moonbat at August 9, 2005 05:51 AMInvade Iran of course!
Sorry, no Army for that, Nuke Iran, of course!
Mary,
You're the best! Thanks for all you do.
Posted by Duckman GR at August 9, 2005 06:14 AM"The Situation Room-CNN
Watching your world to tell you what's happening as it happens and how to deal with it. Tune in at 3 p.m. ET."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I don't think I need CNN to tell me "how to deal with it" once they've relayed news of the day's events. Hey Wolf, I can also cut my own meat, wipe my own ass and remember to floss without your help, OK? Geez..........
Which is exactly what the Administration and Faux News wanted you to be watching, moonbat, instead of thinking about the real news. I was so worried about the shuttle last night, I don't think I got more than 9 hours sleep.
But, yeah, lets retire the shuttle. Gut the whole space program along with Hubble, space station, etc, and follow the president's lead. He is, afterall, a man of such great vision, and dreams of being on Mars in 20 years. What do you bet he and Cheney will be giving Haliburton a nice fat contract when they leave office to build us some new vehicles.
"Prarie Chapel Ranch" - can this guy take a piss without Rove gaming the political implications?
And the press has been reporting from here Day 1 as if Georgie-boy wqas a die-hard rancher like Reagan.
Posted by Flamethrower at August 9, 2005 06:27 AMIt's cool that the Space Shuttle made it back safely. I think it may be time for us to retire the shuttles, though; this run was a little too suspenseful. Posted by dj moonbat
You think? I suggest it was suspenseful as another diversion away from the WH.
Posted by Judith at August 9, 2005 06:49 AMMoonbat Matt - if the run was suspensful, its all the media's fault. There was little suspense if you paid attention to the flight without some wanna-be journalist yammering about foam and felt strips. (this is from someone who was in tears when Columbia disappeared.) I'm happy they're back, and I'm happy that the mission was more or less what they wanted.
As for other launch systems - NASA is really screwed with this, which is why they're working so hard on fixing the Shuttle. NASA literally has no other LEO options if it wants to meet its minimum resposibilities in keeping the International Space Station staffed and stocked with anything bigger than a body bag.
The Shuttle took from 1968-1972 (depending on how you look at the design planning methodologies) through '76 to design, through 1979 to build, & finally launching in 1981. We're talking about a decade to design and build new man-rated launch system. It was only last March that Bush Jr. told NASA to Go To Mars, and NASA hadn't seriously been working on shuttle replacements until then.
There's been some interesting proposals for fast development ideas, most of which all use the solid rocket boosters and external tanks currently in use to launch a wingless crew vehicle or cargo bus, both of which drop the wings and tile systems that make the shuttle so disinctive.
Posted by idiosynchronic at August 9, 2005 06:50 AMDeminNewJ: "The young deserter with his rifle who shot up a bus full of Jewish citizens who happened to be of Arab descent is a chilling omen of the dangers ahead."
It was a bus full of Israeli citizens who were Arab (and not Jewish). You can't be a Jewish citizen. Just clarifying.
The settlers have a right to be angry. They took a big risk to live in Gaza or the West Bank and Sharon was the one who asked them to take it. Now he's turned his back on them. I totally understand where they're coming from, but the time has come for them to leave. Another reason for destroying the homes is so that the Palestinians don't feel they've won. If this were actually part of a peace agreement, maybe the homes would be left standing.
You don't often hear about Jewish fanatics, but they're out there and they're coming out of the woodwork now. I hope the Israeli government can keep them contained.
Posted by CG at August 9, 2005 06:55 AMAnd, hell, it can't be all White House Evil 24/7 until we get Rove or Bush nailed to the freaking wall. These things need time to be properly cooked in the public consciousness and to meet legal the checkpoints at the right time.
I'd hate for the intrest in impeachment or scandal to work to a full fury in August, and then fizzle by the time Fitzgerald comes through with indictments in September or October.
Posted by idiosynchronic at August 9, 2005 06:59 AMIt's about time for a photo op in front of the troops in Iraq - maybe with a dramatic entrance and exit.
Posted by Tim at August 9, 2005 07:06 AMCondi Rice told America's European allies in February 2005, in response to press reports
about a pending American attack against Iran, she said that "the question [of a military strike] is simply not on the agenda at this point - we have diplomatic means to do this".
President Bush himself followed up on Rice's statement by stating that "this notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous". He quickly added: "Having said that, all options are on the table."
We all know that when Bush uses the word "ridiculous", it's a lie.
I would bet that before this year is gone, Bush makes the case for annihilating Iran, and of course, Bolton will agree.
if the run was suspensful, its all the media's fault. There was little suspense if you paid attention to the flight without some wanna-be journalist yammering about foam and felt strips.
I don't know; those seem like the kinds of things that might burn pretty good.
Posted by dj moonbat at August 9, 2005 07:20 AMOne more war on another Islamic country ought to be enough to get the ratings back up to a level that will carry W through the rest of his second term.
Posted by redstater at August 9, 2005 07:29 AMif the run was suspensful, its all the media's fault. There was little suspense if you paid attention to the flight without some wanna-be journalist yammering about foam and felt strips.
I don't know; those seem like the kinds of things that might burn pretty good.
You dry humourist you.
Armando put it best in: "Space Shuttle Crash Watch" . . but I found the whole Discovery coverage unbelievably morbid, as if the only thing about the story was the possibility of disaster. Like waiting around for a car wreck. Rubbernecking is one thing, but pulling up a chair to see if a crash will happen, well, it was distasteful to me.
Posted by idiosynchronic at August 9, 2005 07:56 AMSo I have a question. What productive purpose has the space station been put to so far and what does the future hold for it? Somebody please convince me that it is not just a enourmous and pointless giveaway to the aerospace industry.
Compare and contrast this with the scientific value vs. cost of the Hubble Space Telescope if anyone feels up to it.
Posted by Growth Factor at August 9, 2005 08:07 AMRubbernecking is one thing, but pulling up a chair to see if a crash will happen, well, it was distasteful to me.
Didn't you just define NASCAR?
Posted by muckcat at August 9, 2005 08:21 AM
The purpose for the proposed Mars trip is to allow the Bushies to cancil all that wastful science now planed. Once it is canciled, the Mars trip will vanish--then more tax cuts!
Posted by Jon Stopa at August 9, 2005 08:22 AMDidn't you just define NASCAR?
According to my 6 year-old son, yes.
Which I suppose is a pretty damn good explanation of the media.
Posted by idiosynchronic at August 9, 2005 08:55 AMCJ
My bad. You're absolutely correct. I meant Israeli citizens of Arab ethnicity. D'oh!
Posted by DeminNewJ at August 9, 2005 09:00 AMThe most important event of the day for your pocketbook?
The Federal Reserve is meeting. Should get the word in a couple hours on rate hikes. Looks like a .25% hike is a slam dunk. But most will be looking for Greenspan's wording on the economy and future hikes. Also, any comments on housing, inflation, etc.
Posted by muckdog at August 9, 2005 09:37 AMHave we removed ourselves so far from the truth that we no longer KNOW what the truth is all about!!! WE were the first to spread diease, mass killings, childhood illness and distruction of our enviornment!!! Al,MI, MA,etc l960 watts ! schoolbusing angry parents with hostile and mean faces calling balck children all sorts of nasty names
small poxs for native american baby blankets!!! i think you get the picture
I may be mistaken in haze of 24 years, but I thought the whole tiles on the space shuttle was a temporary fix until better technology came along.
I think locheed has still using sliderules when the space shuttle was designed ;)
Here's some truth for ya. Fed raises short-term rates .25%, and their language suggests there will be no pause in hiking rates. More to come.
The economy is humming along.
Posted by muckdog at August 9, 2005 11:33 AMWhat productive purpose has the space station been put to so far and what does the future hold for it? Somebody please convince me that it is not just a enourmous and pointless giveaway to the aerospace industry.
I think they get in a scientific experiment once in a while, in-between maintenance chores.
Though seriously, those maintenance chores are part of the point: to learn how to (and how not to) support humans in space. It's really just one big engineering experiment. But it's an important one, if we ever actually want to go to Mars or wherever. Even if there's no unique science that can be done by humans as opposed to machines out there, it's still in pursuit of the longer-term goal: colonization.
Is the ISS the most efficient way to go about this? Almost definitely not. It's got too many unique pieces, and is trying to do too much other zero-gravity sciene. It ought to have been more focused on just the supporting-humans-in-space-long-term goal. It should have been constructed of standardized modules of just a few different types, each largely self-sufficient. Every couple of years, they'd launch a set of new modules (via unmanned rockets) with updated designs, based upon the lessons learned so far. Those modules would connect with the station, and perhaps older-model modules could be discarded. It would be a living work in progress, ultimately resulting in real, finalized designs, well-suited for mass production.
Is it a giveaway to the aerospace industry? Given the curent, unfocused design, it's hard to argue against that. But at least, I'd rather have those guys working on a white elephant in space than on some boondogle of a fighter jet or bomber.
Muckdog:
I agree that the economy is doing well -- but from the point of view of corporations and investors.
Not from the point of view of individual workers.
You can quote 5% employment, but I think even you know that's undercounting the real situation, as the statistics don't cover those who have given up looking for jobs, etc. But even then, an ever-growing proportion of jobs are in the lowest-income areas -- overall, income levels are decreasing. And quality of life with it.
Your data point of 150-200k new jobs/mo is interesting, because I've also heard that 150k is the net number of new workers entering the workforce monthly. Though I guess that's why it's a "seet spot"? Since it ensures that 5% figure doesn't get any lower.
Doug, that's why 150K-200K is ideal. Because if the economy is soaking up unemployed folks, there aren't enough to go around. At 5% unemployment, there aren't enough skilled workers to hire at a rate above 200K. So that then puts pressure on wages. Trying to steal other employees from other companies.
Inflation is caused by a rise in the money supply. IE, more wages would be a reason. Thus, when the Fed sees jobs exceeding 200K month after month and sees that starting to spill into wage growth, they start getting worried about inflation.
And then they level the hammer on the economy. Like they did with their rate hikes from 1999-2000. That's what that was all about.
Posted by muckdog at August 9, 2005 12:59 PMIt's over muckdog, you no longer can rattle anybody's cage, much less get a response from them. Pitiful.
Posted by at August 9, 2005 01:01 PMI'd rather have those guys working on a white elephant in space than on some boondogle of a fighter jet or bomber.
As if space--or anything else, for that matter--is going to stand in the way of more bombers.
Posted by dj moonbat at August 9, 2005 01:10 PMMuckdog:
Agreed, Greenspan et al have done a wonderful job of keeping inflation down. (Of course, 7 years without a minimum-wage hike helps too.)
But what about my first point? Is decreasing quality of life part of why the economy is in a "sweet spot"?
Or perhaps you're just keeping the blinders on: no need to worry about details like that, if your investments are doing well.
You can quote 5% employment, but I think even you know that's undercounting the real situation, as the statistics don't cover those who have given up looking for jobs, etc. But even then, an ever-growing proportion of jobs are in the lowest-income areas -- overall, income levels are decreasing. And quality of life with it.
I thought everyone knew by now that the "official" unemployment rate wasn't truly accurate. It was my understanding that it is based on unemployment claims. If that is true, when the benefit period ends for an unemployed worker, they are no longer counted regardless of whether they have found employment.
As for your other comment about the type of jobs being created, I am reminded of a story I saw before the 2004 election, in which the Bush Administration wanted to start counting fast food jobs as manufacturing jobs so they could claim we were creating better jobs than we actually are. Taco construction just doesn't pay as good as it used to.
Yes, the economy is going well for corporations and the wealthy. But for the rest of us, I can tell you that my cost of living increase this year doesn't even make up for the increase of our contribution amount for health and dental, not to mention a health insurance deductible amount that doubled this year.
Posted by ann at August 9, 2005 01:43 PMI don't think your first point was valid, Doug. I think people are doing well in this economy. I've quoted the stats before about highest average net worth ever, highest percentage of folks owning homes ever, and have you tried getting a parking space at Best Buy, Home Depot, or Costco on the weekends in middle class American neighborhoods? How long is the friday night wait at the Outback or Red Lobster in the average middle class neighborhood? Couple of hours?
Also, corporations and investors should thrive. They're the ones taking the risks with their money.
Increasing the minimum wage only has a temporary effect on inflation. Once it is hiked, then prices edge up, everybody else up the income ladder gets a corresponding raise, and we're back to where we were before the minimum wage was hiked. It just kind of nudges the status quo for a few months, but has no lasting impact on anybody.
Posted by muckdog at August 9, 2005 02:00 PMAnn, the CPI includes health care costs. They are accounted for.
Posted by muckdog at August 9, 2005 02:05 PMBy jove muckdoggy, you really are an idiot aren't you? Average income LOL! Do you even know basic statistics? When you are talking about salaries and wages, you need to use MEDIAN. Hell, I'm a millionaire using your stupid average talking points if I go into a bar and a CEO is there.
Real wages have been declining for the past two years.
Posted by Ga6thDem at August 9, 2005 03:53 PMHi Muckdog:
Your reasoning on minimum wage does make sense, but I would contend that it does make a difference -- it helps keep the spread of incomes from becoming too large. And if you don't keep updating it, that spread will re-expand. Which is good for companies, but bad for society, and bad for the existence of a middle class.
I was in Shanghai (where my wife is from) last year. At one point we (actually, my wife and her brother) struck up a conversation with a waiter at a restaurant there -- he was making something like 200 yuan/month. My wife's brother is making around 2000/mo at a data-entry job. Her friends from college are each making around 20,000/mo as software engineers. In the U.S., I doubt that any waiters are making 1/100 the amount I'm taking in, even though I'm pretty well-paid.
I'm pretty sure there are no minimum wage standards in China currently.
I know China has an incredible growth rate right now, and needs to continue at this rate for quite some time, so this large a spread in incomes is probably warranted -- after all, the waiter may still be making a better living than many of the country folk that still make up the bulk of the population. But also note that Shanghai was still full of very poor people -- you could see it by the condition of virtually all of the older neighborhoods. And beggars are constantly after you for handouts on buses/subways/etc. Sure, you have panhandlers in U.S. cities, but I tend to doubt you'll see a mother, with her bare-bottomed 2-year-old clinging at her feet, trying to sell some sort of bootlegged items (I don't remember what they were exactly).
That's not a situation you want to see in a mature economy.
...highest average net worth ever...
Is that mean, or median? The two could easily be heading in opposite directions.
...highest percentage of folks owning homes ever...
Ok, that's to be expected with the low interest rates. Note that it is also accompanied by the highest family debt levels ever. We'll see if it turns out to be a bubble or not, once the long-term rates finally start rising.
have you tried getting a parking space at Best Buy, Home Depot, or Costco on the weekends in middle class American neighborhoods? [etc]
Well, I can't say I can know that, as I live in Silicon Valley -- not exactly average.
But I would point out that such operations wouldn't be built in areas that can't sustain them. How many areas are not getting such places built?
Also, corporations and investors should thrive. They're the ones taking the risks with their money.
Yes, agreed. But it doesn't have to be at the expense of increased poverty, degraded environment, etc.
Posted by Doug at August 9, 2005 03:57 PMGood discussion, Doug. Can't say that I agree with all of your points, but you present them well.
Actually, since housing is the major investment for most people below the "rich" class, they tended to have done well the last few years compared to the "rich" who tend to own stocks. Of course, the stock market has rallied nicely since March 2003, so I'm sure those with diversified assets have done well.
And yes, using median wealth as the yardstick, the number is higher now that it was in 1999. That includes the bear market from 2000-2. Most of that wealth is in housing equity. Of course, 1999 was near the end of the stock bubble, so I'd expect those numbers were artificially inflated.
Posted by muckdog at August 9, 2005 04:33 PMAnd yes, using median wealth as the yardstick, the number is higher now that it was in 1999. That includes the bear market from 2000-2. Most of that wealth is in housing equity. Of course, 1999 was near the end of the stock bubble, so I'd expect those numbers were artificially inflated.
Interesting. Now how does that compare with median income? I don't have any actual numbers offhand, but Ga6thDem above contends it's been falling for 2 yrs.
Put this all together, and it does start to look like a housing bubble. Meaning the rising median net wealth may be illusory.
Honestly, I hope that's wrong -- I have a house too! :) I hope the prices just level off for a while, rather than crashing.
Posted by Doug at August 9, 2005 04:50 PMGood article about inflation, wages and benefits here. Seems like the personal savings rate is also the lowest rate ever. Snow was down in Crawford allegedly saying that least educated and poorest are being left behind in this "sweet spot" economy, not that puppyboy cares about those types of individuals in our society.
Yup time for a new round of calls for making the tax cuts for the toppers permanent right on cue. And never mind about that debt and deficit elephant in the room or that 1 billion dollar a week boondoggle known as the Iraq War that is kept off the books. Yup, we can't properly arm our troops and we continue to cut their benefits and healthcare in the VA system, but lets make those tax cuts permanent so the rich get richer and the rest of us working class idiots pay for it all. Or better yet keep putting the cost of all of these tax cuts on that goverment credit card Bush so wrecklessly enjoys using so that our kids and grandchildren pay for it.
Did I mention how much I dislike these greedy pigs running our country into the ground. Oh the humanity to ask anyone remotely wealthy to actually make any sacrifice to pay for the Iraq War. ...nope make the tax cuts permanent.
Posted by emal at August 9, 2005 05:41 PMMuck, let me do the math for you: I get a 3% COLA. My health insurance contribution wnet from $30/month to $80/month, My health insurance deductible went from $500 to $1,000. Coinsurance went up as well. So, basically, I'm taking home less than before my raise.
As for middle America waiting in line at Red Lobster and shopping at Home Depot, have you asked these people what their debt ratio is? Just because they're willing to spend does not mean they can afford it. And about all those new homeowners, what is the foreclosure rate these days? We know it's only going to get worse once all these folks with interest only ARM get hit with higher payments that they can't afford.
Posted by Ann at August 9, 2005 06:38 PMIf the economy is doing so well, why is it that across the street from is a house that sold back in the spring for $300,000. The current owner of record is hosting the eleven other income-earning persons who live there. They are not necessarily related to the owner of record, as their bumper stickers on their cars reflect several areas of Mexico as 'favorite places'.
It is clear to me that if the economy was doing so well, many of these folks could afford their own places to live, even if only renting apartments, but by renting a bed in this three-bedroom bungalow, they have to be paying something less - and the owner of record can take in enough to make his house payment.
Posted by pessimist at August 9, 2005 07:11 PMWell, Pessimist, you'll remember TV's primetime soap opera "Dallas." Several people lived under one household there too, as I recall.
Ann, I'm just reporting the official numbers. Your experience may not be the same as average Americans' are encountering. Health care is only a part of the total basket of goods and services that make up the CPI. It's about 2%.
Doug, I hope the housing market flattens out a bit and doesn't crash.
Posted by muckdog at August 9, 2005 07:32 PMSeveral people lived under one household there too, as I recall.
This is the best you can come up with? A fantasy developed from a TV show?
I'd expect better from you, muck.
And another sign that things aren't so good as you suggest: My Good Orange County (CA) Republican co-workers aren't saying nice things about King George. Their main complaint is the cost of gas, something our ex-West Texas wildcatter is supposed to know something about. The cost of the gas, necessary for the up to 180-mile round-trip they make every day, is cutting into their play money, and as I've come to know well, one doesn't stand between a Republican and the money he needs to recreate! Ammunition sales, Ski-Doo trips, and gambling junkets to Laughlin aren't happening as often as they used to - and my GOC(CA)R's aren't happy that they have to cut back on these things to make their cars go to get to work.
I suggest setting aside the cost of that kid's meal you're going to owe me!
Posted by pessimist at August 9, 2005 07:41 PMWell, Pessimist, you'll remember TV's primetime soap opera "Dallas." Several people lived under one household there too, as I recall.
Well, muck's gotten back into the nitrous, it appears.
Posted by dj moonbat at August 9, 2005 07:46 PMWell, I was at Home Depot, Bed, Bath & Beyond, and Best Buy (for refrig.) this weekend, and back tonight. Both times Home Depot was so empty I could actually get help. Bed, Bath & Beyond had only one checkout person at the counters, and Best Buy wasn't busy at all.
Posted by Judith at August 9, 2005 07:48 PMJudith, I get similar reports from my son Bookseller, whose shifts at his Barnes & Noble bookstore (in an upscale neighborhood, I might add! Median income $67,752, Average income $80,897.) have been cut again. Sales have gotten so bad there that the corporate management is considering closing that store.
Their main complaint is the cost of gas
Yes, we need to drill in ANWR. Good point, Pessimist.
Remember how in "Dallas," the Ewings woke up every morning and their servants would have breakfast ready for them out on the patio? It was like a 5-Star spread. But JR would like grab a cup of coffee and off he'd go. Bobby might eat a piece of toast, smooch Pam on the cheek, and off he'd go. Ol' Sue Ellen would reach in the closet for a bottle of Vodka, down it and pass out on the floor without even coming down for breakfast.
I love breakfast. I'd skip that formal dinner thing they had instead.
Ann, here's a good link on what's in the CPI. Check it out. Linkie. You're getting quite a deal if you're only pitching in $80 a month for health care.
Posted by muckdog at August 9, 2005 08:42 PMJudith, I get similar reports from my son Bookseller...
At least tell me the boy goes by "Booker."
Posted by dj moonbat at August 9, 2005 08:49 PMAt least tell me the boy goes by "Booker."
Well dj, if that was his legal name, that he would! Since Bookseller is only his nom de blog for my use in referencing him in my posts, such a concatenation is unnecessary!
By the way - I referred above to why one doesn't stand between a Republican and his play money. Here's an excellent example of what Republicans want to play with!
Muck, as always you are so cheerful and willing to share your expert knowledge of the idiot box, but I gotta say that your glee does get a bit old. Most people -- meaning those of us at the lower end of the pay scale -- are doing more work for less money and paying more for the everyday things these last four + years. My collegues and I have only gotten "cost of living" raises two out of the past four years -- oh yeah, while my boss got raises every year -- while being required by that same boss to do more to simply keep our jobs -- including finding ways of eliminating the jobs of those below us.
While you may say this is the way of business -- all it does for me is make me sick and angry.
So Muck, who's your pick for the winner of that dance thang on Fox? How about that other freakish (with reagard to the origin of the title) show Big Brother?
You know we all are looking forward to your updates and commentary.
Actually, since housing is the major investment for most people below the "rich" class, they tended to have done well the last few years compared to the "rich" who tend to own stocks.
Muck, a point about house prices and values:
Most people below the "rich" class are not in the bunch of speculative investors who are doing well in the current real estate market by buying properties to "flip". Most home owners have seen none of the increase in their real wealth or income because of the assessed value of their homes. Many, in fact, have only seen an increase in property taxes because of the higher home value. If you buy a house primarily to live in, as most middle-class Americans do, you are "investing" your money in the mortgage, but unless you sell your house in this boom and move to another market with lower prices relative to the cost of living, you gain nothing.
Home equity won't buy you groceries or health care.
Posted by Kaleefornian at August 9, 2005 09:16 PMHmmmmmmmmm ... No muckdog. His reality allergy must be acting up again.
Posted by pessimist at August 9, 2005 09:22 PMWell, Dorita, have you thought about another line of work? Or maybe a second job?
Kalleefornian, I know lots of folks who have moved and are moving out of CA. They're taking their home equity, which is sometimes sizeable, and paying cash for houses in Nevada, Washington, Idaho, South Dakota, etc.
No more mortgage. Much lower taxes. And they don't have to work so hard to make ends meet. They can do something they like instead of putting in 50-hr weeks.
On the reality show front, the only one I'm partially paying attention to is Rock Star INXS, where I think Jordis is The One.
Posted by muckdog at August 9, 2005 09:41 PMTheir main complaint is the cost of gas
Yes, we need to drill in ANWR. Good point, Pessimist.
*snort* Sorry dude, but talk about a drop in the bucket...
and besides, you really think the gas companies are going to reduce the prices significantly, even if oil become quite a bit cheaper (say, $40-$50)? I mean, if it crashes (say $25), they'd be forced to, otherwise it'd be too obvious, but otherwise -- heh.
What I would have liked to see in that energy bill would have been a mandate for cars sold in the U.S. to have engines capable of handling, say, up to 30% ethanol mix by 5 years from now. All they'd have to do is tweak some parameters, and then boom -- instant market to kick start the agri-fuel business. I mean, the tax breaks the bill is giving them are going to be pretty useless if they don't have a market. But if they had a chance to work with 3rd-party gas stations (say, Costco) to offer 30% ethanol mixtures at prices that undercut pure gas, you might even have some real competition. And ethanol producers, with a new, big, and growing market, would have incentive to start using more efficient crops than corn.
And we'd save one heck of a lot more oil than we could ever get out of ANWR. With cheaper gas to boot. Wouldn't that be something?
Posted by Doug at August 9, 2005 11:32 PMAll they'd have to do is tweak some parameters...
By that, I mean the car manufacturers would only need minor tweaks to the engine designs to let it handle a range of pure gas to X% ethanol.
I think people are doing well in this economy.
Well doing well and thinking they are doing well are two differents things. According to the news this AM, people are not doing well according to the latest poll on the subject.
Posted by Judith at August 10, 2005 05:29 AMMuck, when I started at my current job, the company paid 100% of my health insurance coverage. Now, because health insurance costs have skyrocketed to make up for insurance companies losing so much on their investments.
I don't want to hear I'm getting a good deal, I don't want to have to pay for my own benefits....kind of like how you always talk about not wanting to pay for firemen and traffic lights, etc. whenever you say you don't wnat to pay more taxed. For your tax dollar, YOU'RE getting a great deal on sanitation and water supply, military, etc.
Posted by ann at August 10, 2005 05:47 AMAnd, btw, I started in my current job in Oct 2001. So, from $0 to $80 in less than four years.
Posted by ann at August 10, 2005 06:02 AMAnn, people should be paying 25-50% of your health care bill. That way, they know and appreciate what they're getting instead of feeling entitled to it or taking it for granted.
Posted by muckdog at August 10, 2005 09:46 AMEr, shouldve said "their health care bill" in that first sentence.
Posted by muckdog at August 10, 2005 09:47 AMer Muck,
When you pay your entire health insurance bill, as my husband and I do, it makes you even madder at the insurance companies. We pay approximately $6600 for a family insurance policy that has a $5,000 deductible. It pays for no well care after 5 yrs of age and has no mental health coverage. I guess you would think that this is great? Man, get out of your fantasy world.
Well, Muck, then you shouldn't feel so bad about your taxes.
Actually, I will admit that now that I have to pay in so much more than I was before for my health insurance, I use it far more often and go to specialists when my regular doctor would probably do. So, it's actually costing BC/BS a lot more simply because I feel I should get my money's worth.
Posted by ann at August 10, 2005 11:50 AM